From ...
From: Erik Naggum
Subject: Re: reading/writing bytes smaller than 8 bits?
Date: 2000/02/13
Message-ID: <3159474410537964@naggum.no>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 585537084
References: <3157825117110563@naggum.no> <47lgxnrhf.fsf@beta.franz.com> <3157890087157420@naggum.no> <3158009696783450@naggum.no>
mail-copies-to: never
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Complaints-To: newsmaster@eunet.no
X-Trace: oslo-nntp.eunet.no 950488742 4027 195.0.192.66 (14 Feb 2000 00:39:02 GMT)
Organization: Naggum Software; +47 8800 8879 or +1 510 435 8604; fax: +47 2210 9077; http://www.naggum.no
User-Agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/20.5
Mime-Version: 1.0
NNTP-Posting-Date: 14 Feb 2000 00:39:02 GMT
Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp
* Marco Antoniotti
| Now the question for you is: is this a "legitimate" issue to raise?
implementing a standard is always voluntary. this may annoy some people
(it annoys me _greatly_ at times, like when the stupid Norwegian Language
Council incredulously insists on writing "13.2.00" for today, for the
single, simple, stupid reason that the Swedes write "2000-02-13", and we
can't do anything the Swedes do unless it's really stupid and then not
until they figured out that it was stupid and did something else that we
obviously can't do at that point, but I digress irresponsibly). even
when some proposal is put into a standard, the user community has to be
responsible and take issue with half-witted or bogus implementations.
| > I really think you need to study some copyright law.
|
| Yes and no. I can just ask you :)
yikes! like most other people who give legal advice on the Net, what I
have said on legal matters have turned out to be wrong at some later
date, so this is an almost _frightening_ level of "trust". like the
other day, British authorities came up with this bill that would make it
illegal _not_ to decode files or messages stored on your computer, as if
the bloody obvious assault on every citizen's assumption of innocence
until proven guilty would _not_ be to store files or messages on their
computer to which they did not in fact _have_ a decoding key. the police
often plant evidence in drug cases to incarcerate people they just don't
like, and now they can do the same with computer people they just don't
like. however, a few weeks ago, I would have said this was impossible to
implement under the European Human Rights Convention, but what do you
know? I was wrong: in the interest of removing personal freedom and
security from people's lives when they do something politicians are
afraid of out of sheer, mind-numbing ignorance, _anything_ goes, and
_anywhere_ in the world, even England, with their Magna Carta heritage.
#:Erik